If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   After finding that it engaged in $250 BILLION in illegal transactions with Iran, NY Banking regulators are thinking that they just MIGHT revoke Standard Chartered PLC's banking license   (news.yahoo.com) divider line 60
    More: Asinine, Standard Chartered, Peter Lougheed Centre, revoke, Lloyds Banking Group, diplomatic missions of Iran, law enforcement officials, Legal liability, Barclays plc  
•       •       •

1986 clicks; posted to Business » on 07 Aug 2012 at 2:24 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



60 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-08-07 11:26:53 AM
Nothing will come of this.

Laws are for little people.

Banks are exempt.
 
2012-08-07 11:57:00 AM
We should stop playing the blame game. What's important now is to put this behind us and look forward. We need to stop living in the past.
 
2012-08-07 12:13:27 PM
I love that the one bank paid 500 million in fines. How much did it make breaking those laws?? bwhahahahahahahahha
 
2012-08-07 12:39:38 PM
Wake me up when someone is in jail for this. Otherwise, its just more banking business as usual (that is, shady and corrupt as hell).
 
2012-08-07 12:39:44 PM
repeat on main page
dont make me find it for you
 
2012-08-07 12:58:05 PM

namatad: I love that the one bank paid 500 million in fines. How much did it make breaking those laws?? bwhahahahahahahahha


This is something that has always irritated me about these fines. The banks look at the fine as a cost of doing business, and if they make a shiat ton more than what the fine is going to be then they do it anyway. I think the fine should be all of the profit they made from the illegal activity.
 
2012-08-07 01:05:51 PM

cannotsuggestaname: namatad: I love that the one bank paid 500 million in fines. How much did it make breaking those laws?? bwhahahahahahahahha

This is something that has always irritated me about these fines. The banks look at the fine as a cost of doing business, and if they make a shiat ton more than what the fine is going to be then they do it anyway. I think the fine should be all of the profit they made from the illegal activity.


Make the fine 2x their profit from the last 5 years. TADA
Every other bank will shiat their pants and never do this again.

PUNITIVE has to hurt
 
2012-08-07 01:23:23 PM
Done in one. No criminal liability- no change.
 
2012-08-07 01:37:08 PM
I would be interested to hear Candidate Romney's opinion on whether or not they should have their license revoked, being so hostile to Iran and all. Too bad he doesn't answer questions.
 
2012-08-07 02:04:35 PM
Let me know when their assets are frozen and the people in charge are put on wanted lists.
 
2012-08-07 02:12:15 PM

dr_blasto: Let me know when their assets are frozen and the people in charge are put on wanted lists.


If we're going that far, I say we start with Halliburton. They've been doing business with Iran despite the decades old embargo and sanctions.
 
2012-08-07 02:33:09 PM
Corporations are people, unless we are talking about criminal penalties, then we hold our hands up and say 'what can we do though?' and fine them 0.0002% of their profits.
 
2012-08-07 02:48:15 PM

namatad: cannotsuggestaname: namatad: I love that the one bank paid 500 million in fines. How much did it make breaking those laws?? bwhahahahahahahahha

This is something that has always irritated me about these fines. The banks look at the fine as a cost of doing business, and if they make a shiat ton more than what the fine is going to be then they do it anyway. I think the fine should be all of the profit they made from the illegal activity.

Make the fine 2x their profit from the last 5 years. TADA
Every other bank will shiat their pants and never do this again.

PUNITIVE has to hurt


That fine was far larger than any gains they made on the LIBOR deal. Your point stands in some cases, but the $453m fine was absolutely punitive relative to any profits.
 
2012-08-07 02:53:39 PM
FTA:

A top executive in London shot back: "You f---ing Americans. Who are you to tell us, the rest of the world, that we're not going to deal with Iranians." The reply showed "obvious contempt for U.S. banking regulations," the regulator said

I LOVE this. We're America, you lymie prick. Do what we farking tell you or don't do business in the U.S. You're free to do whatever you want if you don't want a license in the U.S.
 
2012-08-07 02:53:50 PM
See! Regulation does hurt business!
 
2012-08-07 02:57:45 PM
Burn their US offices to the ground, but not before sealing all the exits during working hours
 
2012-08-07 03:01:45 PM
When did George Bluth Sr. become a banker?
 
2012-08-07 03:11:10 PM

unlikely: Nothing will come of this.

Laws are for little people.

Banks are exempt.


Perhaps they forgot to send the monthly bribe to their congresscritters
 
2012-08-07 03:12:19 PM
Defenestrate the farkers
 
2012-08-07 03:13:18 PM
Standard procedure in these cases is executive bonuses all around, pay cuts for everyone else.
 
2012-08-07 03:15:42 PM

Diogenes: dr_blasto: Let me know when their assets are frozen and the people in charge are put on wanted lists.

If we're going that far, I say we start with Halliburton. They've been doing business with Iran despite the decades old embargo and sanctions.


I'm down. Let's do it.

Corporations get limited liability in exchange for exactly what nowadays? They have free speech, they're free to meddle in politics. They push awful arbitration clauses on actual humans. I say, fark em. Break the law, get yer shiat frozen. Gov't takes company in receivership and the board of directors is thrown in the pokey.

Gov't then either 1. sells company whole or 2. parts it out, profits in excess of fines returned to all shareholders on record.

Don't like it? Then maybe stupid corporations shouldn't break the farking law.
 
2012-08-07 03:16:33 PM

cannotsuggestaname: namatad: I love that the one bank paid 500 million in fines. How much did it make breaking those laws?? bwhahahahahahahahha

This is something that has always irritated me about these fines. The banks look at the fine as a cost of doing business, and if they make a shiat ton more than what the fine is going to be then they do it anyway. I think the fine should be all of the profit they made from the illegal activity.


hells yes. they should have to give up all the bootie they made, and Then pay a fine.
 
2012-08-07 03:32:48 PM
Some might say this could be considered light treason.
 
2012-08-07 03:44:19 PM

KrispyKritter: cannotsuggestaname: namatad: I love that the one bank paid 500 million in fines. How much did it make breaking those laws?? bwhahahahahahahahha

This is something that has always irritated me about these fines. The banks look at the fine as a cost of doing business, and if they make a shiat ton more than what the fine is going to be then they do it anyway. I think the fine should be all of the profit they made from the illegal activity.

hells yes. they should have to give up all the bootie they made, and Then pay a fine.


Yes, give up every dollar in revenue generated by the activity, then levy the fine at a highly punitive level. Also, board of directors gets criminal charges when felonious activity is proven. If the crime os severe, I advocate freezing assets and receivership, end with company split up or sold.
 
2012-08-07 03:50:43 PM

dr_blasto: KrispyKritter: cannotsuggestaname: namatad: I love that the one bank paid 500 million in fines. How much did it make breaking those laws?? bwhahahahahahahahha

This is something that has always irritated me about these fines. The banks look at the fine as a cost of doing business, and if they make a shiat ton more than what the fine is going to be then they do it anyway. I think the fine should be all of the profit they made from the illegal activity.

hells yes. they should have to give up all the bootie they made, and Then pay a fine.

Yes, give up every dollar in revenue generated by the activity, then levy the fine at a highly punitive level. Also, board of directors gets criminal charges when felonious activity is proven. If the crime os severe, I advocate freezing assets and receivership, end with company split up or sold.


This can actually happen in a lot of fifnacial crimes cases, there is a remedy the government can seek called "disgorgement" which means the company has to cough up any money they made doing whatever illegal shiat they did, and that's BEFORE the fines are levied.

They don;t use it because, what is the incentive to the banks to settle if the government goes for the max penalty anyways, better to simply roll the tice and drag it out for a decade through a trial and the appeals process.

The Remedy for this IMHO is not to offer a plea baragain to these fars but impose a "trial tax" that triples all damages and fines if you are found guilty after a trial.
 
2012-08-07 04:07:31 PM
When you buy marijuana you're funding terrorism?

www2.pictures.gi.zimbio.com
Drug production/Shipment managers and Dirty bomb financiers.
 
2012-08-07 04:07:53 PM

Magorn: The Remedy for this IMHO is not to offer a plea baragain to these fars but impose a "trial tax" that triples all damages and fines if you are found guilty after a trial.


So the answer to foot-dragging due to harsh penalties is. . . harsh penalties? Unfortunately there really isn't any legal way to fix depravity. Try to corner these demons and they'll fight back with everything they've got, so I'm not in favor of any efforts to shortcut that process. Rather, the resources need to be properly allocated for the scale of the crime, and the banks lobby to underfund the guys who police them for just this reason. It doesn't matter how much teeth a law has when the criminals get to decide the size of the police force.

namatad: I love that the one bank paid 500 million in fines. How much did it make breaking those laws??


What amazes me is that businesses are immensely successful at lobbying these penalties to the point of laughably meaningless, yet they rack up 500 million in fines anyway. If there's any proof that these people are all psychopaths, it's this. There isn't a single behavior-regulating human emotion at work that even slows down these decisions or they wouldn't be able to make them on this staggering scale. Forget stuff like shame, morality or inhibition, even the notion of "enough" just doesn't register.
 
2012-08-07 04:16:09 PM
(Please be advised that paragraph 6 contains reference to language some readers may find offensive)

Who else went straight to paragraph 6?
 
2012-08-07 04:19:09 PM

dragonchild: Magorn: The Remedy for this IMHO is not to offer a plea baragain to these fars but impose a "trial tax" that triples all damages and fines if you are found guilty after a trial.

So the answer to foot-dragging due to harsh penalties is. . . harsh penalties? Unfortunately there really isn't any legal way to fix depravity. Try to corner these demons and they'll fight back with everything they've got, so I'm not in favor of any efforts to shortcut that process. Rather, the resources need to be properly allocated for the scale of the crime, and the banks lobby to underfund the guys who police them for just this reason. It doesn't matter how much teeth a law has when the criminals get to decide the size of the police force.

namatad: I love that the one bank paid 500 million in fines. How much did it make breaking those laws??

What amazes me is that businesses are immensely successful at lobbying these penalties to the point of laughably meaningless, yet they rack up 500 million in fines anyway. If there's any proof that these people are all psychopaths, it's this. There isn't a single behavior-regulating human emotion at work that even slows down these decisions or they wouldn't be able to make them on this staggering scale. Forget stuff like shame, morality or inhibition, even the notion of "enough" just doesn't register.


Youre contradicting yourself, aren't you? You say that penalties are meaningless but then marvel that they'd put themselves in the position of getting a half billion dollar penalty.

If the penalties are meaningless, then why would you be shocked that they'd take a chance on being penalized? If youre surprised that they'd expose themselves to a half billion dollar penalty, then you certainly don't see the penalty as meaningless.
 
2012-08-07 04:19:38 PM

dr_blasto: Diogenes: dr_blasto: Let me know when their assets are frozen and the people in charge are put on wanted lists.

If we're going that far, I say we start with Halliburton. They've been doing business with Iran despite the decades old embargo and sanctions.

I'm down. Let's do it.

Corporations get limited liability in exchange for exactly what nowadays? They have free speech, they're free to meddle in politics. They push awful arbitration clauses on actual humans. I say, fark em. Break the law, get yer shiat frozen. Gov't takes company in receivership and the board of directors is thrown in the pokey.

Gov't then either 1. sells company whole or 2. parts it out, profits in excess of fines returned to all shareholders on record.

Don't like it? Then maybe stupid corporations shouldn't break the farking law.


Good idea, except that the corporations who would be affected by such a law could and would $convince lawmakers to vote against such a bill.


Better More effective idea would be to use the Patriot Act to just outright declare the corporations who do this sort of thing to be terrorist organizations. The corporation's assets, and all assets of every person within the corporation (or just some of those people, with the President being the sole arbiter of who is and who is not a terrorist -- this would allow punishment for the executives responsible while not punishing the minimum-wage mail room clerk, the executives' unpaid interns and the IT guys who get $60-75K/yr but are on call 24/7 and thus get maybe one or two pairs of consecutive days off per year, with one of those two days being a Saturday if they're very lucky), and all assets of parents/spouses/children/roommates of those people, would be seized by the US Government, down to the last unused sheet of toilet paper. Those people would then be subject to being held without trial for the rest of their lives with no hope of ever again seeing natural daylight or breathing natural air.

Yes, I know it would set a very dangerous precedent and would eventually be used by future Presidents to fill the gulags with dissenters, minorities, poor people, more minorities and other undesirables. And No, it's not something I would like to see happen. But the law is already on the books and will remain so until and unless one of three things happen:

1) Repeal. Not gonna happen since you'd need to pass both Houses of Congress (including a 60% majority in the Senate to even allow a vote to happen), then you'd need the President to sign a law that relieves him of the ability to destroy the life of anybody he just plain doesn't like, and THEN you'd need to get 67% of both Houses to override the inevitable veto.

2) Ruled unconstitutional by SCOTUS. Good luck getting a trial to be appealed all the way up there, accepted by the Court, and then getting them to rule in such a way that the Patriot Act is struck down in its entirety AND that the ruling applies to anything more than just that one case. And even then, the President could always pull an Andrew Jackson and taunt SCOTUS' inability to enforce their decision.

3) Dissolution of the US Government:
3a) Successful invasion by a foreign military. Unlikely since we have the world's largest moat, which is currently circumvented by nobody except Canada and Mexico -- and I have a hunch that those countries will be neither willing nor able to stage a successful invasion at any point in the foreseeable future.
3b) Nuclear war. It would certainly work, but unlikely to be used since most of the people who would like America to be destroyed would also like to be around to appreciate it; and the one group of people who wouldn't mind the whole "wiping out all life on Earth" aspect have neither the hardware nor the leadership necessary to make it happen.
3c) Overthrow of the US Government by the People. DEFINITELY not gonna happen. Imagine OWS vs the overmilitarized police departments of New York City and Oakland, writ large; complete with the "liberal" media keeping their coverage of the events to a minimum, and painting the cops in a favorable light and the protesters unfavorably whenever a self-imposed media blackout just isn't possible. Not to mention that the laws which those protesters would be protesting against would be used against anybody and everybody not wholly in favor of sending the protesters to work camps.
 
2012-08-07 04:31:26 PM

Debeo Summa Credo: Youre contradicting yourself, aren't you? You say that penalties are meaningless but then marvel that they'd put themselves in the position of getting a half billion dollar penalty.


No, it's not a contradiction. You seeing that is a colossal failure of scale. If they paid $500 million in fines in a watered-down world of regulations, that means the profits they made on those same transactions are staggering -- easily in the billions.

Debeo Summa Credo: If youre surprised that they'd expose themselves to a half billion dollar penalty, then you certainly don't see the penalty as meaningless.


You know, I used to think you were smart, if badly misguided. I don't know if you're projecting 5th-grader logic in a grown-up conversation to undermine discourse or because you're really that stupid, but either way it permanently damages my ability to take you seriously.
 
2012-08-07 04:49:05 PM

missiv: When you buy marijuana you're funding terrorism?


Drug production/Shipment managers and Dirty bomb financiers.


If only the regulators had found a half ounce of weed in the building they could have seized all the assets!

/that would be awesome if it ever happened.
 
2012-08-07 04:56:13 PM

dragonchild: Debeo Summa Credo: Youre contradicting yourself, aren't you? You say that penalties are meaningless but then marvel that they'd put themselves in the position of getting a half billion dollar penalty.

No, it's not a contradiction. You seeing that is a colossal failure of scale. If they paid $500 million in fines in a watered-down world of regulations, that means the profits they made on those same transactions are staggering -- easily in the billions.

Debeo Summa Credo: If youre surprised that they'd expose themselves to a half billion dollar penalty, then you certainly don't see the penalty as meaningless.

You know, I used to think you were smart, if badly misguided. I don't know if you're projecting 5th-grader logic in a grown-up conversation to undermine discourse or because you're really that stupid, but either way it permanently damages my ability to take you seriously.


Oh, ok i see the point you were attempting to make.

"easily in the billions". You are assuming that based on absolutely no evidence, and using that assumption to support your belief that fines are always minimal relative to profits gained.
Or the other way round.

If they had been fined $10billion,
you'd be here complaining that it was nothing compared to the $50billion profits they must have made.
 
2012-08-07 04:58:59 PM

whither_apophis: missiv: When you buy marijuana you're funding terrorism?


Drug production/Shipment managers and Dirty bomb financiers.

If only the regulators had found a half ounce of weed in the building they could have seized all the assets!

/that would be awesome if it ever happened.


I'd laugh at that statement if I didn't know it's happened to hundreds if not thousands of people in America.
 
2012-08-07 04:59:03 PM
I'll wait until all is said and done before making a final decision, but I don't put much stock in the New York regulators. I used to work at Standard Chartered. In fact, I was in their AML division. We performed rigorous investigations and the investment side didn't touch the whole credit default swap mess. In fact, when we attempted to warn the regulators about the eventual consequences of tying banking investments to the housing industry, their response was pretty much, "Are you crazy? Look at all the money everyone's making!" and we came back with, "Okay, we'll be sitting over there." They've been pretty pissy at SCB ever since they looked like they were asleep at the wheel (which they were) while SCB came out of the crisis unscathed. Ever since they've been been needlessly draconian with their regulations while looking the other way while American based banks are still not using best practices.

If I'm wrong in this and the Feds find something illicit in this, I'll gladly eat my hat. However, I trust SCB a whole hell of a lot more than the New York State financial regulators. In my estimation, SCB is one of, if not the last "good guy" banks out there.
 
2012-08-07 05:21:14 PM

Debeo Summa Credo: "easily in the billions". You are assuming that based on absolutely no evidence


You mean aside from the numbers in TFA and even right in the damned headline? $500 million is 1/500th of the money dealt. That's pathetic. I don't know if they charged their clients a cut or a flat rate, but if they didn't make money it's not my concern.

Debeo Summa Credo: If they had been fined $10billion, you'd be here complaining that it was nothing compared to the $50billion profits they must have made.


No, that'd be a 20% cut of all the money dealt, which would be unusual (though not unheard of for illegal transactions). This is a petulant child's retort, not a serious concern for evidence or due process.
 
2012-08-07 05:29:05 PM

Ragin' Asian: I trust SCB a whole hell of a lot more than the New York State financial regulators. In my estimation, SCB is one of, if not the last "good guy" banks out there.


Unfortunately, big businesses are often highly compartmentalized. I've never dealt with AIG but from what I understand, the people on the insurance side had nothing to do with decisions made on the investment side that destroyed the whole company. So it's entirely possible the foreign arm of SCB ran amok on its own, though I will say it's equally likely New York State regulators are on a witch hunt.
 
2012-08-07 06:13:52 PM

Comic Book Guy: whither_apophis: missiv: When you buy marijuana you're funding terrorism?


Drug production/Shipment managers and Dirty bomb financiers.

If only the regulators had found a half ounce of weed in the building they could have seized all the assets!

/that would be awesome if it ever happened.

I'd laugh at that statement if I didn't know it's happened to hundreds if not thousands of people in America.


Occupy "whatever" needs to change their agenda. It should be Plant Wall Street, Plant Banks. What ever happened to those wall street coke gangs?
 
2012-08-07 06:32:46 PM

dragonchild: Ragin' Asian: I trust SCB a whole hell of a lot more than the New York State financial regulators. In my estimation, SCB is one of, if not the last "good guy" banks out there.

Unfortunately, big businesses are often highly compartmentalized. I've never dealt with AIG but from what I understand, the people on the insurance side had nothing to do with decisions made on the investment side that destroyed the whole company. So it's entirely possible the foreign arm of SCB ran amok on its own, though I will say it's equally likely New York State regulators are on a witch hunt.


I wouldn't disagree with this. If this were the case, though, this would be under the purview of the Basel Committee rather than a state regulatory agency.
 
2012-08-07 06:52:17 PM

dragonchild: Debeo Summa Credo: "easily in the billions". You are assuming that based on absolutely no evidence

You mean aside from the numbers in TFA and even right in the damned headline? $500 million is 1/500th of the money dealt. That's pathetic. I don't know if they charged their clients a cut or a flat rate, but if they didn't make money it's not my concern.

Debeo Summa Credo: If they had been fined $10billion, you'd be here complaining that it was nothing compared to the $50billion profits they must have made.

No, that'd be a 20% cut of all the money dealt, which would be unusual (though not unheard of for illegal transactions). This is a petulant child's retort, not a serious concern for evidence or due process.


What $500b are you talking about? I was referring to that paid by Barclays for the LIBOR scandal, mentioned early in the article. Later in the article, there is mention of fines paid by other banks related to transactions with illegal regimes, but with no mention of the notional value of those transactions.

There is no mention of any fines paid by standard chartered bank, which is the subject of TFA and the bank to which the $250b of transactions in the headline apply. So there is no relation at all between any fine and the $250b, because no fine has been paid yet!!

Add that to the fact that you have no idea of the nature of the transaction and how profitable it was to the bank (wire transfer fees for large denominations charge fees measured in fractions of hundredths of a percent) compounds your complete lack of basis for outrage re size of fines.

It appears that this is yet another financial topic that you dont know shiat about. My suggestion is to quit while you're behind.
 
2012-08-07 07:07:56 PM

missiv: Comic Book Guy: whither_apophis: missiv: When you buy marijuana you're funding terrorism?


Drug production/Shipment managers and Dirty bomb financiers.

If only the regulators had found a half ounce of weed in the building they could have seized all the assets!

/that would be awesome if it ever happened.

I'd laugh at that statement if I didn't know it's happened to hundreds if not thousands of people in America.

Occupy "whatever" needs to change their agenda. It should be Plant Wall Street, Plant Banks. What ever happened to those wall street coke gangs?


And if there's one thing I've learned from Law & Order the left hand doesn't need to know what right hand is doing for it to be a criminal conspiracy. A couple of well placed packages of sudafed and bingo! all of walk street goes down for meth cooking.
 
2012-08-07 07:08:38 PM
walk street?? stupid auto correct
 
2012-08-07 08:16:58 PM
"The Iranian Embassy in Washington was not immediately available for comment."

That's because there is no Iranian embassy in Washington, you farking idiots. Go back to journalism school and take your crayons and half-eaten bottle of paste with you.
 
2012-08-07 08:55:42 PM

Debeo Summa Credo: There is no mention of any fines paid by standard chartered bank, which is the subject of TFA and the bank to which the $250b of transactions in the headline apply. So there is no relation at all between any fine and the $250b, because no fine has been paid yet!!


OK, but we were talking sense of scale. I gotta work with the numbers I'm dealt with. Any of the other numbers in TFA are comparable so the logic doesn't change even if the details do -- you throwing out $10 billion in penalties (hey, at least mine were based on precedent) to project stupidity into an argument no one's making is evidence of your own stupidity or disingenuous unwillingness to put these numbers in perspective, not any test of my argument's integrity. At least you've found a way to feel smugly superior, though. I'm sure that's very important.
 
2012-08-07 09:50:19 PM

RumsfeldsReplacement: Some might say this could be considered light treason.


Others might read the article and realize that the bank is from the UK, thus negating any charges of "treason" arising from acting against the US.
 
2012-08-07 10:48:09 PM
 
2012-08-07 11:29:34 PM

dragonchild: Debeo Summa Credo: There is no mention of any fines paid by standard chartered bank, which is the subject of TFA and the bank to which the $250b of transactions in the headline apply. So there is no relation at all between any fine and the $250b, because no fine has been paid yet!!

OK, but we were talking sense of scale. I gotta work with the numbers I'm dealt with. Any of the other numbers in TFA are comparable so the logic doesn't change even if the details do -- you throwing out $10 billion in penalties (hey, at least mine were based on precedent) to project stupidity into an argument no one's making is evidence of your own stupidity or disingenuous unwillingness to put these numbers in perspective, not any test of my argument's integrity. At least you've found a way to feel smugly superior, though. I'm sure that's very important.


Yeah I tend to feel smugly superior when people I'm arguing with use completely unrelated numbers to come up with meaningless ratios to try to justify their irrational beliefs. "1/500th of the money dealt"!?!?! Like I said, quit while you're behind.
 
2012-08-07 11:30:02 PM

HeWhoHasNoName: "The Iranian Embassy in Washington was not immediately available for comment."

That's because there is no Iranian embassy in Washington, you farking idiots. Go back to journalism school and take your crayons and half-eaten bottle of paste with you.


Which is why they weren't available.

/mental gymnastics, I tell ya
 
2012-08-07 11:43:03 PM
so uh, bank is getting fined but no one is going to jail for what could be considered treason?... wow. one of these days an angry mob is going to storm the bank sky scrapers like the Bastille, and simply kill everyone and burn everything to the ground.
 
2012-08-07 11:53:41 PM

HeWhoHasNoName: "The Iranian Embassy in Washington was not immediately available for comment."

That's because there is no Iranian embassy in Washington, you farking idiots. Go back to journalism school and take your crayons and half-eaten bottle of paste with you.


I did a little googling. The Iranians handle their embassy stuff through Pakistan's delegation.
 
Displayed 50 of 60 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report